Vintage Synth Explorer Forums

Hugo76 wrote:I'm not the one representing the elitist position. There is no denying

Presented without comment.

commodorejohn wrote:

Hugo76 wrote:I'm not the one representing the elitist position. There is no denying

Presented without comment.

Jesus f**k Christ. Advance the thread or STFU.

knolan wrote:You're missing the point !

I understand the point you are trying to make, but it ignores the fact that some people just can't be bothered to fully explore a synthesizer to begin with. Not every one is a synth programmer and not everyone is a conventional keyboard player. There's a dozen shades of grey between the two. If someone would rather use presets, that's fine with me. It just means those who do program from scratch have the advantage of having unique sounds. But to say that you'll potentially be forced to be less creative if the option to save sounds is there, that's just ridiculous. You are essentially saying that people have no will of their own.

Silicon:

- did Rick Wakeman need preset programs on his Minimoog?

and:

- did not having them affect how he used the instrument?

- in what ways?


@Re-Member: take your point. So in that instance - don't get an instrument with no program memory - it's not for you. I'm not arguing for an approach that needs to be adopted by everyone. Nor am I arguing that all synthesisers should not have presets (I adore my SY77 and its presets !!).

I'm making a point which is - spending time at a synthesiser with no presets is a very different experience to spending time at one with presets - and history has shown this (it has been discussed to death and well documented). A synthesiser without presets is a different beast to one with presets (the Juno 60 is a totally different experience to a Juno 6, for example). You might not see it, but it is the case. And, as mentioned above, I'm not talking about programming - I'm talking about experimenting, live performance, shaping sounds that move in realtime with human interaction and so on (you can't 'preset' that!).

As said - if not for you then don't get the instrument; but there is no denying that the experience at an instrument without presets opens up mind sets and creative possibilities that seem to 'collapse' when working at an instrument with presets (over a prolonged period - not in one given session, mind). You fall back not he presets and stop using it creatively in the same way. Its the lack of presets that forces realtime, live interaction (there's no other option with it!!).

Others are getting annoyed with this thread - I'll leave it at that.

knolan wrote:@Re-Member: take your point. So in that instance - don't get an instrument with no program memory - it's not for you.

But I do already own synths that have no patch storage and I'm fine with them.

knolan wrote:I'm not arguing for an approach that needs to be adopted by everyone. I'm making a point which is - spending time at a synthesiser with no presets is a very different experience to spending time at one with presets

And spending time with a synthesizer is very different experience than playing a bagpipe. There's really no concrete point being made here since you can be creative with either one.

knolan wrote: - and history has shown this (it has been discussed to death and well documented).

What has it shown? Is it better, is it worse? Because if it is just "different," all that proves is a preference for one over the other. I would say that history isn't on your side of the argument here because within the past 30 years, more synthesizers have been produced with patch storage and presets than without, yet music continues to evolve with the technology.

knolan wrote:A synthesiser without presets is a different beast to one with presets (the Juno 60 is a totally different experience to a Juno 6, for example). You might not see it, but it is the case.

Actually, the Juno-60 boots up in "Manual" mode and bypasses any preset sounds, so it's not a drastically different experience unless you choose to make it so.

knolan wrote:And, as mentioned above, I'm not talking about programming - I'm talking about experimenting, live performance, shaping sounds that move in realtime with human interaction and so on (you can't 'preset' that!).

As a matter of fact, I can "preset" that experience by saving a patch and then simply reloading it later while not touching any knobs. And again, my Juno-60 and JP-8000 both have "Manual" mode. You press it once and the synth engine changes its sound to match the position of every knob and slider as if no patch was ever loaded.

knolan wrote:As said - if not for you then don't get the instrument; but there is no denying that the experience at an instrument without presets opens up mind sets and creative possibilities that seem to 'collapse' when working at an instrument with presets (over a prolonged period - not in one given session, mind). You fall back not he presets and stop using it creatively in the same way. Its the lack of presets that forces realtime, live interaction (there's no other option with it!!).

I never said anything was wrong about the lack of presets or patch storage on the upcoming Odyssey. Personally, I could care less. I just posted to point out how ridiculous some people are getting trying to rationalize such a thing as if being able to save a sound were a hindrance on creativity when in reality, you can just not use the feature. Again, you are essentially making out to be like no one has freewill or direct control over their own creative choices.

Cumulus already hit the nail in the coffin and there's no talking around the facts:

Cumulus wrote:Re: mindset, sound design approach, interaction with the control surface, and musical performance approach...

You are not locked into any of these things just because you could push a button and save the patch you're using

I wish more of the guys that played Odysseys in the 70s, 80s (thanks CzRider) would chime in on this thread and bring it out of shitstorm city.

This is a strange thread....

it takes all of 20 seconds or so to get the sound you want on an Odyssey. If anything sounds 'weird', bring down mixer levels and mod amounts and you'll be back at square one again in 5 seconds flat. Set osc tuning and yer away.

And yes, adding patch memories would add significantly to the cost and complexity of the build. And it will also change how it sounds to an extent.

So chill out, guys. MIDI-ing notes is trivial and cheap to implement - adding CCs and memories are not.
This is going to be a cheap synth; not built for gigging relentlessly. Any benefit to having memories in this synth are negligible in the long run, 'cuz you'll know everything you need to within an hour of turning it on.

commodorejohn wrote:

celebutante wrote:On the flipside, it used to be owned by The Captain of Captain and Tennille fame. Wee!).

Please, please, please tell me it was what was used for the squeaking noises on "Muskrat Love."

Can't say for sure. But I liked to imagine it was!

shaft9000 wrote:This is a strange thread....

it takes all of 20 seconds or so to get the sound you want on an Odyssey. If anything sounds 'weird', bring down mixer levels and mod amounts and you'll be back at square one again in 5 seconds flat. Set osc tuning and yer away.

And yes, adding patch memories would add significantly to the cost and complexity of the build. And it will also change how it sounds to an extent.

So chill out, guys. MIDI-ing notes is trivial and cheap to implement - adding CCs and memories are not.
This is going to be a cheap synth; not built for gigging relentlessly. Any benefit to having memories in this synth are negligible in the long run, 'cuz you'll know everything you need to within an hour of turning it on.

Well put. My sentiments exactly.

knolan wrote:...I have never met you, but I know that if two synths are put in front of you with the same feature set and control surface, but one with patch memories and one without; you will explore the one without the patch memories more; and use the other one differently - to create coveted programs that you'll then store. And - when you fill the memory banks, you'll stop exploring. Why? Because - what's the point - you have no where left to store them.

I'm sorry but you don't know that. All else being equaI, I will probably explore the one WITH patch memory more. When I play a synth with patch memory I tend to pull up random patches and twiddle the knobs to see what it does. I have learned a lot about sound design by starting with someone else's sounds and messing with them.

If running out of patch memory makes you quit creating patches does that mean you quit after one good patch on a MiniMoog?

If your iPod gets full do you quit downloading songs or do you finally delete that Tori Amos bullshit that you can't believe you bought back in the day? (You may substitute whatever music downloads you later regretted for Tori Amos in the preceding sentence).

When I run out of memory on a device I start re-using slots because I can always recreate a sound. plus i've probsbly gotten better at programming it and may be tired if the old patches. Some devices also allow you to transfer memory to and from a computer.

knolan wrote:And tell me - in all the forums you have every followed, have you ever, even once, seen a thread lamenting the lack of presets on an original Minimoog?

Yes, here: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much- ... synth.html

and here: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/electron ... -d-11.html

Yes, I know they're both Gearslutz but you did say "in all the forums".

I have also seen patch storage lauded on the Voyager. In fact, I have seen people respond to "it's not as good as the original" with " yes, but it has patch memory so in that way it's better."

I would submit that more features are better than fewer.

I would also say that you don't have to use every feature on every synth. I often dial in sounds on the MicroKORG without saving them. In fact, every time I play it I tweak the knobs but I rarely save my patches. Having a starting point dies not in anyway prevent me from exploring the sounds.

Sometimes on my Mini Moog or CS-50 I will randomly set a few parameters before turning it on. That is like starting with someone else's preset. I then tweak the knobs.

Now, if memory comes at the cost of sound or build quality then there can be a discussion. At that point I may opt for no memory if the synth will sound better or cost less but claiming that having memory will make a person suddenly incapable of sound design is absurd.

knolan wrote:- did Rick Wakeman need preset programs on his Minimoog?

He had no choice.

knolan wrote:- did not having them affect how he used the instrument?

Well, he had two or three of them on stage already set up with particular patches.





Just sayin'

See you in September

Just to put a very fine point on it...I would love some patch memory on my Mini Moog...

One of the nice extras the original late model Odyssey had was the CV and gate/trigger outs.
The Odyssey had a decent CV out that summed the glide/portamento, 2 octave up/down transpose switch, and the pitch bend/vibrato from the PPC pads. Along with the gate and trigger out, made for an interesting controller. Perfect for driving a Little Brother or 2600. Wonder if Korg will be able to reproduce or even bother to include that feature? Guessing the keyscan will be digital.

Still trying to figure out what that SCI 700 does?

How many pages later and I still find it funny to lump together Patch Storing and someone using presets.
I also like how -if I design a patch I am more likely to play it better and do more in my 'performance' than someone using a preset sound. "yeah, it's a preset, you can't touch it in real time"

I wish we'd all just start telling the truth.
Many that create their sounds from scratch believe they DO MORE in the creative process and have more authorship and thus are SUPERIOR [insert whatever you claim to be] than those with [presumed] less programming knowledge and technical forge-ist skill. And since you feel your approach is BETTER, you are licensed to claim things out of thin air like...more expressive...and original....and such....

Which locks us into the circle of "You don't get my point!" because someone is sooo right, surely the other person must not understand what they are saying. Cause if they did, they would certainly agree. Or perhaps they ...lack something....that keeps them from being as right as you are. And now you have to find a way to let them know they lack this thing without being too, too insulting....

There's this whole other school of thought that a performance is the actual performance of notes dropping one after the other and not just tied to 'sounds being tweaked in real time'. Or a perfect tone being dialed in. That you don't need an original sound to make original music. That even if every person on this forum made a song using the same 5 sounds, there would be a wide range of music created.

There's also the notion that patch storage in any shape only goes so far. No one uses EVERY SOUND or even likes every sound. If it can be programmed, you will program it eventually. You basically have to and if you don't, god bless you for being able to keep buying a whole new synth for slightly different patches.

-------------------------

On the overall topic, this piece probably *shouldn't* have memory since the original didn't.
And I doubt it will. I'm assuming somewhere they said 'faithful recreation' and not an updated version.

Anyone hear what the price might be around?